Humidity warping a card does not lead to compromised (damaged) cardstock.
Indents are the definition of compromised (damaged) cardstock. Layers of the stock are physically compressed, leading to the appearance of an indent.
In my opinion, whether something is fixable (able to be restored) is irrelevant to whether damage occurred. I just don’t view humidity warping as causing damage to the underlying cardstock.
Frankly, I don’t see a meaningful difference. A warped card also has strain and physical compression being applied to it. The difference is the strain is global across the card and not localized to one area.
Altering humidity or giving a pressure treatment reduces the strain and fixes the card in both cases. Again, I really don’t see the difference.
Also I should just add nuance here that not all dents are equal, specifically I’m talking hypothetically about ones that can be entirely removed by some kind of moisture treatment
Yea for me laying a book on a card to flatten out a curve isnt altering, but using humidity to press a crease, indent or curvature out of a card is. I believe pressing is a pretty standard practice in comics, but Im not in love with the idea anywhere.
If you could remove an indent or crease by putting a book on it, that wouldnt be altering, but using a heat press to manipulate the material is. It seems kinda trivial and funny when i lay it out like this but it makes sense in my heart
Seems like the logic here is primary based on emotions about how people feel about certain kinds of damage and not physical reality.
Hypothetically, if I cause a light impression on a card, the paper/pulp material is chemically unchanged but has planar distortions. If I use humidity to remove the planar distortions, the card is once again chemically unchanged (with exception to maybe H2O content, which is already expected to be variable) but the planar distortions are removed. Functionally, the card is just being returned to its original state - you are doing the same thing when you iron clothes, and it would be weird to think of an ironed shirt as altered. If we simply don’t like the fact that it has gone through some “process”, then flattening out a curved card is basically the exact same thing, so it’s a double-standard to say one is ok and the other is not.
The reason I believe this is an emotional argument is because the primary difference is that cards will curve “naturally” and a dent requires some kind of mishandling. I can’t help but feel that is the hangup. Although arguably, letting cards enter a curved shape is also mishandling of storage, and on a longer term.
Im a bit of an originalist when it comes to card conditions and expectations. What I mean is that I expect for the card to be in original condition or be noted. If it has been changed in a way that the card would not experience naturally then, for me, it probably falls somewhere into altered or restored even if it isnt able to be detected
So cards becoming curved and straightened is part of natural environmental cycles of the cards life that do not permanently change the card, dust or dirt accumulating that is able to be blown off or wiped simply (no chemicals) falls into the same category. A dent being restored to original level is not natural or something that could naturally occur in the cards lifetime. Microscratches being filled or smooth is not original.
The primary difference is physical damage to the card. I don’t view humidity temporarily affecting the curvature of a holo card to be damage. No portion of the cardstock is altered or compressed. It’s temporarily strained by humidity. I do view physical pressure exerted onto the surface of a card so extreme that it leaves a dent as damage.
Returning a dented card to its original state is physically altering the compressed portion of the cardstock - this is the definition of restoration. Reducing humidity to fix a cupped card is not altering the cardstock, because it was never physically compressed or damaged in the first place.
This isn’t an emotional argument, it’s about damage to the cardstock and the reversal of said damage (i.e., restoration).
My main issue is how the chemicals will react with the paper over time. No one knows this and it’s a major risk for PSA and their guarantee.
There are thousands of cards that have been ‘cleaned’ out there - and Im 99% sure MOST big guys on IG do this.
That being said, I don’t think creams affect the cards as they are wiped off quicky. The cardboard isn’t soaked.
The discussion over the creams are funny as some people think they “fill in” whilst others say they “remove layers” and act more as an abrasive.
Creams don’t remove layers or “fill in” scratches - they just make the holo more shiny. These cards have years of oils, dust and particles on them that dull the holo. This removes that.
Scratches are still very much present and aren’t hidden from graders who actually do their job.
If anyone removes dents, or whitening or cuts cardstock then I’d agree that is 100% Restoration and should be marked us such on grading labels if identified.
Most valuable pieces of art have history of restoration and it’s clearly part of the history and is known to any buyer.
The key is transparency - and most people in this hobby are trying to make a quick buck and are not transparent.
I wanted to note that I’ve used PlastX on a scratched vintage holo to see if the abrasives in the cream removed the scratches, and they did. Not all creams are meant to be used as abrasives as you correctly note, but the ones that include abrasives do work as intended. A very minor amount of ink even came off of the holo surface.
If the polish is PH neutral (acid free) then there should be no long term harm to the card.
I believe someone did a test on YouTube where they put the polish on different items made of metal for a few months to see if there would be any reaction to the surface. After they cleaned the items the surface just looked the same as they had started.
It must have been 1-2 years by now. I took a look on my phone and couldn’t find photos. Let me see if I can find the card and take pictures of it in 2024. Originally it smelled strongly of PlastX, but we’ll see if it still smells like it a few years later.
This makes complete sense - also, sports guys have been doing this for years with little to no effect.
The ones that do show effects were soaked and had glue removed from them (thinking cigarette/chewing gum cards with gum/glue stuck on them for years and then soaked to removed). There are videos on YT about this.
In my humble opinion, we card (especially in pokemanz) people like to get very upset about things without actually having any real information - and there is only one (very loud) opinion being voiced, as the contrary ones (and those who may do it) are shut down extremely quickly.
As I said above, transparency is key and polishing a holo doesn’t constitute altering in my opinion - so long as it doesnt add/remove layers.
I think PSA should have a qualifier for these things if they detect it, but mark is as restored - but I understand that this opens a big can of worms/problems for them, e.g… who restored it and to what degree of professionalism.
@Dyl would love to see some pics if you have any of your plastx test bunny.
I agree that Pokémon is extremely reactive, but when PSA states they consider it altering, that’s ultimately just the answer. Since they are the majority grading company, it really just matters what they decide.
@charizardespana Here it is! The unaltered copy was rough and moderately played. Probably a PSA 5.
In 2024, it does not smell like PlastX anymore. The texture of the holo looks a little strange to me, but I also know that it’s altered. I left some of the deeper scratches because I only did one or two coats. If I spent more time and used more PlastX, it’s possible that those deeper scratches would have been removed from the abrasives. I’ll also note that the holo surface is unusually reflective, almost like a mirror. I can see myself in the reflection of the card, which seems odd to me.
Hope this helps! Although I strongly discourage altering cards like this, it seems reasonable for science.
Oh wow! It indeed looks very strange to me and i would hope graders would pick up on that (CGC would grade it as an error though haha).
Love how the print is still there though, lol.
From what I have seen, the creams don’t do anything of the sort to the holo and they look normal - it does leave a bit of a smell though, pro tip for PSA.
Paper trimmer, Rupes polisher and some cutting compound. Finish off with a little wax to preserve the freshly polished surface, I see no issue here. Submit to SGC, PROFIT BAYBEE
